Author Archive
Close More Sales Deals Faster
Posted by: | Comments
Today, David Fields of AscendantConsulting.com (I recommend going to his web site and signing up for his excellent “Insight” newsletter) and I conducted a conference call for the International Association of Contract and Commercial Management. You can listen to it here: Close Sales More Sales Deals Faster (it lasts a little less than an hour and includes role plays to make the lessons more apparent and fun to listen to).
David directs the Ascendant Consortium, a group of elite, independent consultants with an unmatched record of success helping individuals and companies achieve their goals. Prior to being tapped by the Ascendant Consortium, Mr. Fields was the lead partner at a national management consulting firm where his work included optimizing growth strategies and moving companies into new markets.
During the call, we covered the following topics:
I. KEYS AND PRINCIPLES: BUY, PAY, GET, DO, TRUST. The key business issues that need to be clearly spelled out in a contract are “Buy, Pay, Get, Do, Trust.” David speaks about the sales concepts of “Getting to No” and “Net Preference”. You can learn more about these concepts in the “Insight” newsletter.
1. BUY – What Is Being Bought/Sold?
The Discovery Phase: Vendors often use unclear terms such as “Solution” or “Server”. Customers should either know exactly what they want, or set up a low price initial phase where the vendor works with the customer to design a specification. Vendors should, based on their own internal sales constraints, use a discovery phase to be able to focus in on what the customer cares most about. Remember, at the end of the day, the only possible things to sell are a good/product/deliverable, or a service.
2. PAY – What Is the Price?
Clear Budgeting and Forecasting Is Essential. Vendors often demur on providing an exact price, often because there is lack of clarity as to what is actually being sold. The price often ends up being a “moving target” during negotiations and even after the contract is signed, which causes internal budgeting problems for the customer.
3. GET – When Will the Deliverable/Service Be Provided for the Customer’s Use?
There Must Be a Clear Due Date for Performance. Vendors often don’t provide a clear completion date, or will provide a date at which point some of the work will be done, but not all, so the customer is still not ready to go, dashing customer expectations.
4. DO – What Must the Customer Do So the Vendor Can Hit the Deadline and Not Add More Charges?
Clear Customer Responsibilities Must Be Spelled Out. Avoid vague language such as “Customer will provide all reasonable and necessary resources” and focus on clear language such as “Customer will provide a 10 foot by 10 foot room with a temperature maintained between 50 and 80 degrees at all times, and provide electric service and a T1 Internet connection.”
5. TRUST - Is the Contract Clear as to the Above Issues?
A Clear Contract Prevents Disputes. If not, the negotiation can take a great deal of time, involving the exchange of many versions and many meetings, ultimately resulting in a contract with language that involves a series of compromises. A contract that is clear prevents disputes and creates trust because if, at a later date, one party makes an unreasonable demand of the other, the parties can then review the contract and find that the unreasonable demand is not allowed.
II. MANAGING YOUR LAWYER: NEGOTIATING BUSINESS TERMS & CONTRACT VERSIONS.
1. There Is Nothing New Under the Sun – The Salesperson and Customer Need to Know Ahead of Negotiations:
1.1 Buy, Pay, Get, Do and Legal Positions: What Are Your Positions on What Is Being Purchased, at What Price, for What Delivery Date, What Do You Need to Do, as well as What Are the Legal Positions?
1.2 The Lawyer: Discussions Should Involve The Lawyer or a Way to Manage the Lawyer if Legal Approval Is Necessary.
1.3 Backup Clauses: Backup Positions Should Also Be Decided, Leaving the You Prepared for Almost all Negotiating Possibilities.
2. Take the Lead: The Client Should Take the Lead on Negotiating Business Terms Issues, Not the Lawyer.
3. Decide Level of Risk: The Client Should Ultimately Decide Legal Terms Involving Risk Such as Limitation of Liability and Indemnification.
4. Too Many Versions, Too Much Time: Once the Client Sees Many Contract Versions Exchanged, or Too Much Time Has Elapsed, the Client Should Ask for a Negotiation Conference Call With All Stakeholders to Try and Agree on Final Language and Close the Deal.
If you enjoy this content, add me at twitter.com/JasonAnderman, thank you.
Breakthroughs, Contracts & Ubuntu: The Forces of Tradition vs. The Forces of Modernity
Posted by: | Comments
The New York Times Technology Section has an article entitled “Mark Shuttleworth’s Five Lessons on Organizational Change.” For those of you who have never heard of Mr. Shuttlesworth, he’s the man behind Ubuntu, which is one of the most popular Linux operating systems in the world. As open source software such as Linux becomes more and more popular, applications like Ubuntu can overturn the traditional way of doing things. Ubuntu, for instance, has several huge advantages over Windows. For one thing, it’s free. It also can be altered to your heart’s content (assuming you have the programming chops to do so). As such, Ubuntu is becoming increasingly popular around the world, making inroads in both the for profit and not for profit worlds.
Why would contract people care? Well, given the uproar Ubuntu has caused in the IT world, one would think Mr. Shuttlesworth might have a pearl of wisdom for us about implementing change (a huge issue for people pushing for clearer language in the confusing contract world):
“To persuade people to make changes, you have to offer them compelling and dramatic improvements. If you are asking people to change the way they work, it isn’t enough for a product to be slightly cheaper or slightly faster or slightly newer. One needs to deliver a 50 percent saving in cost and improved reliability (or efficiency or functionality) to create space for one’s product in a crowded marketplace. You have to be 50 percent, 100 percent better. Not just ten percent.”
Basically, the argument breaks down to the idea that people just will understand that something dramatically better is worth obtaining, so if you offer a breakthrough product, then you can make a difference.
I wish I could say I shared such a similarly rosy view of the world. Unfortunately, I think Shuttlesworth’s faith in breakthroughs misses the incredible power of path dependence. Douglas North, from my alma mater, Washington University, won a Nobel Prize in economics for explaining how people will make highly inefficient decisions if they support a particular way of doing things (or path) that they are particularly attached to. This is not because the transaction costs are so high that people can’t afford to switch. It’s simply because people are uncomfortable with change. At my previous job, I created a new method for negotiating contracts that reduced the time to conclude a deal by more than 60% (on average), but none of the other lawyers wanted to adopt this method, mostly because they would have to change the way they do things.
Ken Adams, perhaps the best expert on contact drafting in the United States, touched on this very idea recently, referring to “The Forces of Tradition.” Adams discusses the frustrations of lawyers who try to provide clear, concise contract language and run into lawyers who absolutely refuse to accept this, instead insisting on the complex, mind numbing legalese that makes our work impenetrable. As Adams says, “it’s chaotic, and it feeds off confusion, expediency, inexperience, and timidity.”
Adams reminds me of the time I was working at a major law firm and all the associates were required to take an all-day seminar with a contract drafting expert (who charged the firm a hefty fee, I’m sure). At the end of the day, I revised a contract I was working on to match the expert’s suggestions. When I received my draft back from the partner on the deal, I noticed that he crossed out every change I made and replaced my concise provisions with lengthy, confusing language! While Adams thinks The Forces of Modernity will eventually win, I am not so sure. Regardless, it will take a very long time.
I do think, though, that there are pockets of opportunity for smaller firms and solos to push forward better contract language. And, of course, here at WhichDraft.com, we hope to play a useful role in this regard.
If you enjoy this content, add me at twitter.com/JasonAnderman, thank you.
Big Law, John Grisham and the Future of Our “Profession”
Posted by: | CommentsI was practicing law at a top 100 law firm in the New York City area when my firm recruiter asked me to interview a Harvard law student for a summer associate position. Sitting across from me, the young man reminded me of my
prior self. Prestigious law school. Moot court success. Law journal. Published. Volunteered. Traveled the world. Spoke Spanish. I looked up from my desk. My gray desk. Surrounded by gray shelves and gray walls. He was sitting in a gray chair. He ever so slightly began slumping back. Why? He had just heard my response to his question, “What is life like here at the firm?”
I’m not sure why, perhaps it was the recent evening where I stayed up all night reordering the exhibits in a corrupt MS Word document, maybe it was the last equity partner tirade I’d been on the wrong end of. Most likely it was the promising in-house counsel position I was interviewing for, but I decided to be completely candid with the young man (for our purposes, let’s call him “Bob“).
John Grisham recently said “life in big firms has deteriorated to the point where they’re filled with very unhappy lawyers.” And he couldn’t be more right. I explained to this earnest student that there are great opportunities at law firms. You can make a very nice salary, bonuses are excellent (in good times), and free gourmet restaurant dinner delivery plus a town card ride home are pretty cushy. That said, there’s a reason why salaries are high. You need the money to pay off your astronomical student loans. The high salaries also convince you to put up with having dinner with your Dell laptop instead of family and friends. You also may be a bit crestfallen to see the tremendous gross profit on associates such as yourself (the hourly rates are so high that you actually wouldn’t be able to afford to hire yourself). Equity partners, the ones who command a big roster of clients that pay even bigger bills, rule the roost. If they want to behave in a despicable manner, such as, for instance, throwing a stapler at the head of a secretary, cursing out an associate, or commanding a paralegal to write a memo on where to find the best sushi, they can do so.
Pro bono work? Some firms are better than others, but the amount of engaging work you could do helping poor people or nonprofits was definitely limited by how bad you wanted a large bonus or to make partner someday. For the most part, firms do not see substantial pro bono work as making you partner material, no matter what their brochures say. Children? Well, the divorce rate is through the roof for lawyers, which generally is not ideal for kids, though you do have a good chance of meeting your next spouse at work since this is where you will be spending most of your time. You might want to send your kids to boarding school, or hire a team of nannies (one equity partner I knew worked until her water broke, and was back at work the day after she gave birth; she said she didn’t know what she would do without her 3 nannies).
The blood drained out of Bob’s face. He asked me if I was serious. I said I was. He asked me what time I leave at the end of the day. I said on a really great, fantastic day, I left at 9pm (somehow others did much better, trademark prosecutors often left before 7pm, amazing!). He asked me if it was better anywhere else. I said yes, but he probably wouldn’t be making anywhere near as much money (which, when you are in your mid-20s and have $150,000 of debt, is not what you want to hear).
I did mention that he could become a corporate in-house lawyer and have much better hours, or pay off his loans in Big Law and then jump to a government job/not for profit/small firm lifestyle. I noted that he could pick up some strong skills in our corporate department, along with not a small amount of resume prestige, which would serve him well in his career. But nothing I added could pick up his mood. Eventually, he wriggled up in his chair, looked me dead in the eye, and thanked me for my candor, saying that I was the first person he’d met in his many interviews who seemed to be completely honest with him. Then he walked out the door.
What does this tremendous unhappiness mean? After all, it extends far. Clients are notoriously upset with the Big Law world. Wal-Mart even froze rate hikes not too long ago. Larry Ribstein thinks that people need to wake up and realize that law is not a profession but a business. He even thinks Big Law is dead. But it’s not. Sure, right now there are some major law firms failing. And many others are paring the ranks, freezing salaries and skipping bonuses. But, at the end of the day, there will still be big lawsuits and big deals. And big companies will demand the highly responsive, constantly accessible, pristine service that Big Law is known for. Major law firms are struggling just like companies in other industries are struggling. Even though The Sharper Image went bankrupt, people will still buy gadgets. The same is true for lawyers. And almost all professions are businesses. Saying you have to be one or the other is a false dichotomy. We are a profession, and we have a higher purpose over and above the needs of our clients, which is to ensure that through honesty, fair dealing and transparency, we create enforceable contracts and support the smooth functioning of society.
However, the longer the current recession lasts, the more likely it is that small firm lawyers will lead the way with new methods to provide legal services at affordable rates that fit in client budgets. This is a point made by Carolyn Elefant at myshingle.com, and exemplified by lawyers such as Jay Shepherd who provides up front flat fee prices.
So the Bobs of the world will still have the opportunity, if they choose, to walk down the dark path of Big Law, but they hopefully will have more compelling alternatives in the future as well.
If you enjoy this content, add me at twitter.com/JasonAnderman, thank you.




